1

reputation, influence, and sanctity. Some of them, it is commonly inferred from St. Paul's words,2 taught the people, others rendered public services in some other way. If, however, this distinction between teaching and ruling elders ever existed at all, which I neither affirm nor deny, it certainly does not seem to have been of long continuance, for St. Paul requires of all presbyters or bishops, that they be able to teach and instruct others.3

§ 9. As few among the first professors of Christianity were learned men, and fit for imbuing with a knowledge of heavenly things minds unprepared for it, God saw the necessity of raising up, in many churches, extraordinary teachers, to discourse, when the Christians met, on things pertaining to religion, and reason with the people in his own words. These are the persons who in the New Testament are called prophets. The functions of these men are limited too much by those who make it to have been their sole business to expound the Old Testament scriptures, and especially the prophetic books. Whoever professed to be such a herald of God was allowed publicly to address the people; but there were present among the hearers divinely constituted judges, who were at no loss to distinguish true prophets from false ones. The order of prophets ceased when the necessity for them was past.

§ 10. That the church had its public servants or deacons, from its first foundation, he will not doubt who recollects that no society can be without such persons, but least of all, bodies like the first ones formed among Christians. Those young men, accordingly, who carried out the corpses of Ananias and his wife, were, without question, the deacons of the church at Jerusalem, attendant upon the apostles, when it met, and awaiting their commands. These first

1 1 Tim. iii. 1. Tit. i. 5. 2 1 Tim. v. 17.

31 Tim. iii. 2. See concerning the word presbyter, Camp. Vitringa, de Synagoga vetere, lib. iii. p. i. cap. i. p. 609, and J. Bened. Carpzov. Exercit. in epist. ad Hebræos, ex Philone, p. 499. On the thing itself, or rather the persons designated by this title, see J. Fr. Buddeus, Ecclesia Apostol. cap. vi. p. 719, and Christoph. Matt. Pfaff, de Originibus juris eccles. p. 49.

Rom. xii. 6. 1 Cor. xii. 28; xiv. 3, 29. Ephes. iv. 21.

See Mosheim's Diss. de illis, qui prophete vocantur in N. T. [in Diss. ad Hist. Eccl. pertinentes, t. ii. p. 125, &c.; also Witsius, Miscell. Sacra, tom. i. Koppe, Excurs. III. in Epistolam ad Ephes. and Schleusner, Lericon in N. Test. art. #poonτns, no. 10. Tr.]

Acts v. 6, 10. Those who may be surprised that I should consider the young men, who interred the bodies of Ananias and Sapphira, to be the deacons of the church at Jerusalem, are desired to consider, that the words νεώτεροι and νεανίσκοι, young men, are not always indicative of age; but often, both among the Greeks and Latins, indicate a

function or office. For the same change is made in these words, as in the word presbyter, which everyone knows is indicative, sometimes of age, and sometimes merely of office. As, therefore, the word presbyter often denotes the rulers or head men of a society or association, without any regard to their age; so also the terms young men and the younger not unfrequently denote the servants, or those that stand in waiting; because ordinarily men in the vigour of life perform this office. Nor is this use of the word foreign from the New Testament. The Saviour himself seems to use the word verepos in this sense, Luke xxii. 26, δ μείζων ἐν ὑμῖν, yevéσow is & vewтepos. The word μeicwv, he himself explains by ἡγούμενος, so that it is equivalent to ruler or presbyter: and instead οι νεώτερος, he in the next clause uses ὁ diakov@v, which places our interpretation beyond all controversy. So that μeiswv and VewTepos are not here indicative of certain ages, but of certain offices; and the precept of Christ amounts to this: Let not him that performs the office of a presbyter or elder among you, think himself superior to the public servants or deacons.'-Still more

deacons of that body were chosen from Jews born in Palestine, and as they were thought by individuals of the nations who came from foreign parts to show party-spirit in distributing benefits, the apostles caused seven other public servants, or deacons, to be appointed for that portion of the church at Jerusalem which consisted of Jews who had lived or were born abroad. Six of these were complete foreigners, as their names bear witness; but one was taken from the proselytes, a class of persons that supplied many of the first Christians at Jerusalem, and hence could as fairly claim attention as Jews who had lived in other countries. The example of the church of Jerusalem being followed by all other Christian bodies, in obedience to the injunctions of the apostles, they likewise appointed deacons.2 There were also, in many churches, and especially in those of Asia, female public servants or deaconesses; who were matrons or widows of unquestionable character, that attended to the poor, and discharged other duties.3

§ 11. In this manner Christians managed ecclesiastical affairs so long as their congregations were small, or not very numerous. Three or four presbyters, men of gravity and holiness, placed over those little societies, could easily proceed with harmony, and needed no head or president. But when, as churches grew larger, there was an increased number not only of presbyters and inferior ministers, but also of labours and occupations varying in character, it became necessary that the council of presbyters should have a president, a man of distinguished gravity and prudence, who should distribute among his colleagues their several tasks, and be as it were the central point of the whole society. He was at first denominated the angel, but afterwards the bishop; that word in Greek being indicative of his principal business. It would seem that the church of

evident is the passage 1 Peter v. 5, duolws

νεώτεροι ὑποτάγητε πρεσβυτέροις. It is manifest from what goes before, that presbyter here is indicative of rank or office, denoting teacher or ruler in the church; therefore its counterpart, verepos, has the same import, and does not denote persons young in years, but the servants or deacons of the church. Peter, after solemnly exhorting the presbyters not to abuse the power committed to them, turns to the deacons and says, 'And likewise ye younger, i.e. ye deacons, despise not the orders of the presbyters, but perform cheerfully whatever they require of you.'-In this same sense, the term is used by Luke, Acts ν. 6, 10, where νεώτεροι οι νεανίσκοι are the deacons of the church at Jerusalem, the very persons, whom, a little after, the Hellenists accused before the apostles of not distributing properly the contributions for the poor. I might confirm this sense of the term young men, by numerous citations from Greek and Latin writers, both sacred and profane; but this is not the place for such demonstrations.

5

3 For an account of the deacons and deaconesses of the ancient churches, see Casp. Ziegler, de Diaconis et diaconissis, Wittemb. 1678, 4to. S. Basnage, Annales polit. eccles. ad ann. 35, i. 450. Bingham, Origines Ecclesiast. book ii. ch. 20 [and Mosheim, de Rebus Christ. &c. p. 118, &c., where he defends, at great length, his somewhat peculiar views, respecting the seven deacons of the church at Jerusalem.]

Apoc. ii. iii. [The title of angel occurs only in the Apocalypse, a highly poetic book. It was not, probably, the common title of the presiding presbyter; and certainly was not an older title than that of bishop, which is so often used by St. Paul in his epistles, which were written long before the Apocalypse. See Schlegel's note here. Tr.]

[Enioкonos, an Inspector, or Overseer, with which the Latin Episcopus is identical, and from which the word expressive of that officer in all European languages is derived. S.]

Jerusalem, when grown very numerous, after the dispersion of the apostles among foreign nations, was the first to elect such a president, and that other churches in process of time followed the example.'

§ 12. Those, however, who judge of bishops in the first and golden age of Christianity from their successors in the following centuries, blend and confound characters that are very different. For in this century and the next, a bishop had charge of a single church, which might ordinarily be contained in a private house; nor was he its lord, but in reality its minister and servant; instructing the people, conducting all parts of public worship, and attending on the sick and necessitous in person. Undoubtedly, such things as he could. not manage and perform he committed to the presbyters; but he had no power to decree or sanction anything until it was approved by the presbyters and people.2 The emoluments of this singularly laborious and perilous office were very small. For the churches had no revenues, except the voluntary contributions of the people, or oblations; which, moderate as they doubtless were, were divided among bishop, presbyters, deacons, and poor.

§ 13. It was not long, however, before the extent of episcopal jurisdiction and power was enlarged. For the bishops who lived in cities, either themselves, or through their presbyters, gathered new churches in the neighbouring towns and country. As these churches continued under the protection and care of the bishops by whose ministry or procurement they received Christianity, ecclesiastical provinces were gradually formed, which the Greeks afterwards denominated. dioceses. The persons to whom the city bishops committed the government and instruction of these village and rural churches, were called chorepiscopi,3 that is, bishops of some country place or district. They were a sort of intermediate class between bishops and presbyters, being inferior to the former, superior to the latter."

[Mosheim, de Reb. Christ. &c. p. 134, in a long note, argues from the traditional accounts of a longer catalogue of bishops in the church of Jerusalem than in any other church, during the first ages, that the church of Jerusalem must be supposed to have had bishops earlier than any other. Tr. — The first in the series of bishops of Jerusalem is said by Eusebius to have been James, known as our Lord's brother, and surnamed the Just. (H. E. ii. 1.) Some have identified him with James, the son of Alpheus, thus making him one of the twelve apostles: but Eusebius (i. 12) places him among the seventy disciples. His importance in the church of Jerusalem appears to have been established at least as early as the third year after St. Paul's conversion. (Gal. i. 19.) Subsequently, Scripture makes him leader in the settlement of that question respecting Mosaic obligations, which occupied what is called the council of Jerusalem. (Acts xv. 13.) Unless ancient profane authority had been correct in designating him Bishop of

Jerusalem, the scriptural accounts of his prominence there are far from intelligible. S.]

2 [All that is here stated, may be clearly proved from the records of the first centuries; and has been proved by Bingham, Origines Ecclesiast. Beverege, Codex Canon. primit. ecclesiæ, and others. Mosheim, de Reb. Chr. &c. p. 136.]

3 [Τῆς χώρας ἐπίσκοποι. Murd.]

Learned men, who have written largely on the subject, have debated whether the chorepiscopi ranked with bishops, or with presbyters. See J. Morin, De sacris eccles. ordinatt. pt. i. exerc. iv. D. Blondel, de Episc. et Presbyt. sec. iii. Beverege, Pandect. Canon. ii. 176. C. Ziegler, de Episcopis, 1. i. c. 13, p. 105, &c. Peter de Marca, de Concordia sacerd. et imperii, 1. ii. cap. 13, 14. Boehmer, Adnott. ad Petrum de Marca, p. 62, 63. L. Thomassin, Disciplina eccles. vet. et nova, pt. i. 1. ii. c. 1, p. 215. — But they did not belong entirely to either of those orders. Mosheim, de Reb. Christ. &c. p. 137.]

§ 14. All the churches of primitive time were independent bodies, no one of them owing subjection to any other. If they were, indeed, founded by an apostle, they had often the honour of being consulted in difficult and doubtful cases; yet they had no judicial authority, no control, no power of giving laws. On the contrary, it is clear as the noon-day, that all Christian churches had equal rights, and were in all respects on a footing of equality. Nor does there appear, in this first age, any vestige of that consociation of churches in the same province which gave rise to councils and metropolitans. Rather is it established, that, in the second century, a custom of holding councils took its rise in Greece, and thence extended into other provinces.1

§ 15. Among the Christian teachers whose writings rendered an additional service to the church, the first rank is clearly due to the apostles, and to certain of their disciples, whom God moved to place on record the deeds of Christ and his apostles. The writings of these men are collected into one volume, and are in the hands of all who profess to be Christians. For such matters as concern the history of these heavenly books, and for arguments by which their divine authority and uncorrupted integrity are proved,3 those learned men are to be consulted who have written professedly on such subjects.

§ 16. As to the time when and the persons by whom the books of the New Testament were collected into one body, there are various opinions, or rather conjectures, of the learned; for the subject is attended with great and almost inexplicable difficulties to us of these latter times.* It must suffice us to know, that before the middle of the second century, most of the books composing the New Testament were in every Christian church throughout the known world, and were read and regarded as the divine rule of faith and practice. And hence it may be concluded, that it was while some of the apostles were still living, or certainly while their disciples and immediate successors were everywhere to be met with, that these books were carefully distinguished from other things written by man." That those four of them which are called Gospels were combined during the

It is commonly said that the meeting of the church in Jerusalem, which is described Acts xv. was the first Christian council. But this is a perversion of the import of the term council. For that meeting was a conference of only a single church, called together for deliberation and if such meetings may be called ecclesiastical councils, a multitude of them were held in those primitive times. An ecclesiastical council is a meeting of delegates from a number of confederate churches. [This seems an arbitrary definition. Ed.]

2 See on this subject, J. A. Fabricius, Bibliotheca Græca, 1. iv. c. v. p. 122-227 [and Jer. Jones, Method of settling the canonical authority of the N. T., 3 vols. 8vo, and the modern Introductions to the books of the N. T. in English, by T. H. Horne, and

J. D. Michaelis, ed. Marsh; and in German, by Haenlin, Krug, Bertholdt, Eichhorn, &c. Tr.]

The [early] writers in defence of the divine authority of the N. T. are enumerated by J. A. Fabricius, Delectus argumentorum et syllabus scriptor. pro verit. relig. Christiane, cap. 26, p. 502. [On the subject itself, the modern writers are numerous, and generally known. Lardner and Paley still hold the first rank among the English. Tr.]

See Jo. Ens, Biblioth. sacra, seu diatriba de libror. N. T. canone, Amstel. 1710, 8vo, and Jo. Mills, Prolegom. ad N. T. sec. i. p. 23, &c. [Westcott on the Canon, Camb. 1855. Ed.]

5 See Jo. Frick, de Cura veteris ecclesiæ circa canon. cap. iii. p. 86, &c.

lifetime of St. John, and that the first three were approved by this holy personage, we learn from the testimony of Eusebius. And why may we not suppose that the other books of the New Testament were collected into one body at the same time?

§ 17. Besides other causes requiring this to be done early, there was one that rendered it absolutely necessary, namely, a variety of commentaries, filled with impostures and fables, on our Saviour's life and sentiments, composed soon after his ascent into heaven, by men who, without being bad, perhaps were superstitious, simple, and piously deceitful. To these were afterwards added other writings falsely ascribed to the most holy apostles by fraudulent individuals.2